Page 3 
present and to refrain from judging, and possibly giving false credibility 
to any proposed "moral or ethical" issues. This is particularly important 
for this branch of recombinant genetics since, basically, biohazards result 
from the ability of an organism to escape confinement and to infect other 
organisms, including man. Obviously, microorganisms present a far greater 
danger of escape and infection than do plants and animals. Recombinant 
animals have a very low probability of escape and certainly a recombinant 
animal cannot infect other organisms or transmit its genome to them. None- 
the-less, it is recombinant animals that the non-scientific population fear, 
simply because these species are biologically closer to humans. This fear 
is emotional and does not have any basis in reality. I hope the RAC can 
serve society by pointing out the basic differences between real potential 
biohazards and unfounded emotional concerns. 
In addition to my concern about the very nature of Mr. Rifkin's 
proposal, I would like to point out several specific examples of how our 
society will suffer if this proposal were to become public policy. Clearly, 
any biologist realizes that the whole animal serves as a much better 
experimental system than in vitro systems or cells in culture. By cloning 
specific genetic sequences and introducing these sequences into the germline 
of experimental animals, the manner in which those portions of genes 
responsible for genetic regulation function is rapidly being understood. 
Although these studies are of utmost importance in understanding fundamental 
biological mechanisms, the ramifications of the early studies in this 
emerging area of molecular biology are enormous for cancer research, 
research on inborn genetic disorders, and for agriculture and the rural 
economy . 
Studies by Palmiter and Brinster, using the SV40 T-antigen "oncogene" 
and fusion genes incorporating this tunor inducing gene, and by Leader and 
Stewart, with fusion genes of the myc oncogene, have added more to the 
understanding of oncogenesis than decades of studies in cultured cells. 
Now, mouse lines with known specific genetic sequences which induce 
oncogenesis are available. The role of specific regions of oncogenes in 
oncogenesis may now be dissected. The detailed mechanism of the oncogenesis 
process, provided by these studies, will provide the basis for an eventual 
cure of this dread disease. Clearly, the study of human oncogenes in mice 
is a highly moral undertaking allowing the study of human cancer in 
laboratory animals. Should a crucial aspect of cancer research be stopped 
because of Mr. Rif kin's ethics? 
Tens of thousands of people in the U.S. suffer from a broad range of 
genetic disorders. Studies with animal models for these diseases which use 
gene transfer to place functional genes into the animal's genome to replace 
the function which is deficient, provides the single most successful 
methodology to study these disorders. The impact of this technology on this 
field of medicine of genetic disorders has been reviewed recently by 
N.I.H.'s, W. French Anderson. Are the personal ethics of Mr. Rifkin more 
important than the hopes and lives of these patients? Should their lives be 
[ 468 ] 
